It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Wayfarer
Well, morality isn't governed by the heart, so... I don't see morality and intelligence as being exclusive of each other. That said, I don't see "saving the world from its own stupidity and bad choices" as being part of morality, either. Decisions have consequences and letting natural consequences happen is arguably a moral course of action. It is, after all, how a species grows and strengthens, the culling of the weakest is necessary in all species for the good of the whole.
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Wayfarer
I think you're missing my point. I'm saying that the moral thing to do is, sometimes, not saving people from themselves. If the majority is harmed by their continued existence, then the moral thing to do is to allow nature to take its course and remove the harm from the equation. That would seem to be the antithesis of the liberal definition of morality.
ETA: I won't entertain the convenient inclusion of Jesus into this conversation. We've been told time after time that religion has no place in political discussions, so I fail to see why anyone should allow the artificial inclusion of it when it conveniently serves a specific narrative.